Cretinous Fuckwittery!

 

When you allow mentally ill people to set the rules for everyone else, you end up living in an insane asylum!

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts

The Science Museum's Descent into Absurdity: Lego Bricks Have Penises

In what can only be described as the pinnacle of woke nonsense, the London Science Museum has launched what seems to be a self-parody with its self-guided tour, "Seeing Things Queerly." This tour, in an astonishing leap of illogic, claims that Lego bricks, yes, those colourful blocks beloved by children and adults alike, can be "anti-LGBT." How, you might ask in disbelief? By having parts that "mate" with each other, apparently designated as male and female, thereby reinforcing heteronormativity.

Let's unpack this utter drivel. According to the museum's guide, the top of the Lego brick with sticking out pins is considered "male," while the bottom with holes is "female." The act of connecting these bricks? That's "mating." If this sounds like a stretch, it's because it is. It's not just a stretch; it's a leap into the stratosphere of idiocy.

This isn't education; this is indoctrination. The Science Museum, once a bastion of scientific inquiry and enlightenment, has now become a stage for the most bizarre and unfounded gender ideology. It's as if the museum has decided that instead of teaching children about physics, chemistry, or biology, it would rather confuse them with pseudo-intellectual garbage about toys and gender politics.

The museum's assertion that Lego bricks perpetuate heteronormative structures lacks any semblance of empirical evidence. No credible study, research, or even a casual survey of Lego users would support this ludicrous claim. It's a narrative spun out of thin air, fuelled by the current obsession with seeing gender in every nook and cranny of daily life, including, apparently, in children's toys.

But let's be clear, this isn't just about mislabelling toys. This is about the broader, more sinister trend of institutions bending over backward to cater to a fringe ideology that sees everything through the lens of identity politics. It's about transforming educational spaces into battlegrounds for ideological wars, where facts take a backseat to feelings and unfounded assertions.

The backlash has been swift and well-deserved. Critics, including the charity Sex Matters, have rightfully branded these claims as "completely bonkers." It's not just about disagreeing with the interpretation; it's about recognising the profound disconnect from reality that such statements represent. Fiona McAnena from Sex Matters pointed out the absurdity by stating, "The idea that Lego is 'heteronormative' because the blocks are described as 'male' and 'female' is ridiculous."

Moreover, this fiasco has not gone unnoticed on social media platforms like X, where posts reflect a sentiment of disbelief and ridicule towards the museum's stance. The general consensus seems to be that this is a new low for what should be a respected institution.

What's particularly galling is the implication that children, playing innocuously with Lego bricks, are somehow being indoctrinated into heteronormative views through the simple act of building. It's an insult to the intelligence of both children and adults to suggest that the mechanics of a toy designed for creativity and learning are inherently political or sexual.

The Science Museum needs to return to its roots—promoting science, not pseudoscience. It should be about expanding minds with knowledge, not shrinking them with baseless ideological assertions. If the museum wants to engage in discussions about gender and sexuality, it should do so with factual, evidence-based exhibitions, not by twisting the narrative of a toy loved across generations.

In conclusion, the Science Museum's claim about Lego bricks is not just a misstep; it's a full-frontal assault on common sense, science, and the sanctity of play. It's time for institutions like these to stop playing the fool in the court of public opinion and start focusing on what they're supposed to do: educate, inspire, and perhaps, most importantly, keep their exhibits grounded in reality.

 

Better not tell them about electrical lugs have male and female parts!

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts

Nanny Thinks Old People are Too Expensive

 

Kit Malthouse MP, leading supporter of the bill, says the terminally ill are “reliant on expensive care services” and that prohibiting assisted suicide is “costly in monetary terms”.

Here’s the video. Full quote below.pic.twitter.com/b4Z028vIei

— Dan Hitchens (@ddhitchens) January 22, 2025

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts

WEF Nanny Admits Defeat!

 

Davos panel: Trump has won, and we have lost.

"This is the greatest comeback in political history... Therefore, he thinks he can do anything."

"We need to also factor in not only who's won, which is Trump, but who's lost, which is to say us."

"The European Union... have… pic.twitter.com/X0hVMe3LzT

— Wide Awake Media (@wideawake_media) January 22, 2025

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts

Nanny's Orwellian Crackdown: Turning Pubs into Free Speech Gulags

 

In what can only be described as a descent into a modern-day Orwellian nightmare, Labour's recent employment reforms have taken aim at one of the last bastions of unfiltered British culture: the pub. The Labour government, with its newfound zeal for micromanaging the minutiae of everyday life, has introduced policies that effectively transform local watering holes into no-go zones for free speech. Here's why this should alarm every Brit who cherishes the right to a good, old-fashioned debate over a pint.

From Cheers to Censorship

The heart of the issue lies in Labour's reinterpretation of harassment laws within the confines of pubs. Under the guise of protecting workers, the new employment rights bill mandates that landlords play the role of "banter police," surveilling conversations to prevent any potentially offensive remarks. This means that discussions on topics like politics, religion, or even football could be curtailed if someone finds them "harassing." Imagine the scene: two blokes at the bar, one a staunch supporter of Brexit, the other a remainer, both now needing to whisper their opinions lest they offend someone or, worse, the pub staff.

EHRC's Alarm

Even the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), not typically known for its libertarian stance, has raised red flags over these measures. The EHRC warns that Labour's approach risks severely curtailing freedom of expression, which is supposedly a fundamental right in this country. This is not about protecting the vulnerable from real harassment but about pre-emptively silencing any conversation that might stir controversy, thereby stripping pubs of their role as communal discussion forums.

A Culture of Fear

The implications are vast and deeply troubling. Pub landlords, already grappling with the economic fallout from various policies, now face the additional burden of policing speech. This doesn't just infringe on the rights of the patrons; it places an unfair onus on landlords, potentially leading to fewer people daring to voice their opinions for fear of repercussions. The chilling effect this has on free speech cannot be overstated. Pubs, which have historically been places where ideas are exchanged freely, now risk becoming sterile environments where only safe, government-approved topics are discussed.

The Irony of Labour's Legacy

It's a cruel irony that Labour, a party with roots in workers' rights and free speech, now champions policies that could very well be Orwell's "1984" in action. By attempting to regulate speech in such an intimate setting as the pub, Labour reveals its true colours: not as a guardian of liberty but as an architect of control. This move isn't just about protecting workers; it's about controlling the narrative, about ensuring that only the "right" kind of speech is heard, thereby eroding the very essence of British pub culture.

A Call to Arms

The British public must see this for what it is: an assault on the freedoms they hold dear. The government's role should not be to dictate what can be said over a pint but to protect the right to say it. The Labour Party needs to be reminded that freedom of speech is not a luxury but a necessity, especially in the informal settings where ideas are freely exchanged. If we allow this precedent to stand, we're not just losing our pubs; we're losing our voice.

In conclusion, Labour's employment reforms are a stark reminder that when government oversteps to regulate personal interactions, the cost is often our most cherished liberties. The time to speak out is now, before the only conversation left in pubs is the silent nod of agreement with the status quo. Let's not allow our local to become a place where freedom once rang but now lies silenced under the heavy hand of state control.

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts